Is the Linux SETI client really that much slower?

[Swanny]

Hello all,

I have an Athlon XP 1800+ on an ECS K7S5A (PC2100 RAM) running Mandrake Linux 9.1 that I'm not real happy with performance wise. It's running the i686-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1 SETI client from in a konsole window that runs all the time in KDE 3. This rigs gets an average WU time of 4:04.

I have another AXP 1800+ on an Abit KR7A-RAID (PC2100 RAM) that runs the i386-winnt-cmdline client in Win2K. It gets an average time of 3:26.

Although this is a big difference, I have always attributed this difference to the Via KT266a chipset having a faster memory controller than the SiS 735. Last night, I bought an AXP 1600+ off a friend and decided to drop it in my dad's machine, which had a 1Ghz T-bird on an ECS K7S5A, also with PC2100 RAM. This machine runs the i386-winnt-cmdline client, under XP Home. This morning, it's WU times with the new 1600+ were just under 4:00 hours.

So, my question is: Is the Linux i686-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1 client really that much slower that on the same mobo and RAM types it pretty much equals out the performace of an 1800+ on Linux and a 1600+ on Windows? If it isn't, what could be wrong with my Linux rig that's making it slower?



Thanks,
Swan

 

[Confused]

run the windows cli on wine on the linux box and you'll get good times 🙂


Confused

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Confused
run the windows cli on wine on the linux box and you'll get good times 🙂

Confused

What about VMWare with a lightweight Windows install for running DC? Yes, I know the memory usage would be higher, but I'd be interested to see if it's any more efficient than WINE. 🙂